If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I'm aware of that, however simply saying all people who "self-inflict" their injuries have to pay is 1) ridiculous and 2) would be an expensive and logistical nightmare which is already one of the main issues.

Simply put, it would cause more problems than it solves.

Oh, I agree - the admin alone would cost more than any savings. I suspect the approach will be increased charges for things like prescriptions, as well as possibly visit to doctors and possibly even A&E.

I personally don't think ANY self-inflicted injury should be treated on the NHS. I think it's appalling that I (21 year old broke student) can't get a ganglion (painful swelling resulting from tendon damage that is no fault of my own) treated on the NHS, while people who have, for example, drunk themselves into liver failure, get free treatment on the NHS.

As someone who is only here due to Australia's medicare system, people who think like this contribute to a lot of suicides. Because people who are suicidal feel like a burden. And you're saying they will burden the system. So why bother getting help? I could have died from my self inflicted injury but due to the free medical help I could get I didn't. I also got put in the mental health system and get free visits to a $200 an hour psychologist that I could *never* afford otherwise.

As someone who is only here due to Australia's medicare system, people who think like this contribute to a lot of suicides. Because people who are suicidal feel like a burden. And you're saying they will burden the system. So why bother getting help? I could have died from my self inflicted injury but due to the free medical help I could get I didn't. I also got put in the mental health system and get free visits to a $200 an hour psychologist that I could *never* afford otherwise.

You're precisely an example of what I mentioned before. My son and bf would also be very lost without the very limited support they get from the NHS to the point of self neglect if I wasn't around. People just don't understand sadly.

We have both medicare and private health insurances, public and private hospitals as well as general practitioners, it doesn't stop people coming into A&E for a headache. And reasonably you can't turn them away in case it's something major with only the symptom being a headache.

Retired: Central Labret, SeptumTattoos:Have: Paw on left wrist with snowflake & dog's name & yob-yod underneathPhoenix on left forearm & Universe Horse right thigh pieceFuture: Top/rest of sleeve - to be designed

Yeah cos more people would be dead from not being able to afford insurance.

The government could act to insure people otherwise too poor to pay for their own insurance. I am not convinced that having the government as an (almost*) monopoly supplier for services such as medicine and education is an entirely good thing. Making the majority (except for the really poor) aware that their premiums are affected by their lifestyle would be a good thing.

The catch would be to ensure that premiums are not related to factors outside the individuals control (age, dna, existing medical problems), but does relate to self-inflicted problems such as drug use, lack of exercise, poor diet etc.

The NHS as it exists is not going to be affordable in the long run. In reality the options are:

1) Carry on as currently, with postcode lotteries, long waiting times etc etc
2) Start charging for more things - GP visits, hospital stays etc etc
3) Switching to some form of public/private system
4) Switching to some form of an entirely private system - this would be the worst for the poor of course.

* There is private medicine, but not really for emergency care, or ultra-complex care at present.